Monday, September 15, 2003
Follow the money
Buried in Paul Krugman's lucid and compelling article on the winger's tax cut con in Sunday's Times is this little gem:
Funny thing! The very people who funded the VWRC and the coup against Clinton—the Scaifes, the Kochs, the Coors, and other owners of huge, closely held corporations— are the very people who benefit the most from Bush's tax cut!
Coincidence? You be the judge.
You know, over the past weekend the Times had two great articles with terrific, full-page analytical graphics—the kind that would make Edward Tufte proud. One was on the power failure in the Midwest; the other was on changes to the architecture for the new WTC.
It's a shame that the Times never gives money in politics (particularly VWRC money) the same level of coverage. WaPo never does either.
I hate to think that the Times and WaPo turn a blind eye because the Sulzbergers (the Times) and the Grahams (WaPo) also benefit, just as the Scaifes, the Kochs, and the Coors do, from the effects on the tax code of the VWRC's attempt to roll America back to the Gilded Age.
I'd like to think that their sense of civic responsibility will eventually lead them to cover the story.
Indeed, the 2003 tax cut has already proved a major boon to some of America's wealthiest people: corporations in which executives or a single family hold a large fraction of stocks are suddenly paying much bigger dividends, which are now taxed at only 15 percent no matter how high the income of their recipient.
Funny thing! The very people who funded the VWRC and the coup against Clinton—the Scaifes, the Kochs, the Coors, and other owners of huge, closely held corporations— are the very people who benefit the most from Bush's tax cut!
Coincidence? You be the judge.
You know, over the past weekend the Times had two great articles with terrific, full-page analytical graphics—the kind that would make Edward Tufte proud. One was on the power failure in the Midwest; the other was on changes to the architecture for the new WTC.
It's a shame that the Times never gives money in politics (particularly VWRC money) the same level of coverage. WaPo never does either.
I hate to think that the Times and WaPo turn a blind eye because the Sulzbergers (the Times) and the Grahams (WaPo) also benefit, just as the Scaifes, the Kochs, and the Coors do, from the effects on the tax code of the VWRC's attempt to roll America back to the Gilded Age.
I'd like to think that their sense of civic responsibility will eventually lead them to cover the story.
